Best gamblers vs the best tournament players? Who has more skill?

I would guess the best players are the ones who gamble WITH THEIR OWN.

I have heard stories that a lot of the really high stakes gambling involves long races (50 or 100) and can grind on for hours and hours. I can't even imagine how long "15 ahead" match would take between two pros.

My perception is that tournaments are usually much more intense for much shorter races.

To me, this feels like very different types of pressure. One is a long, grinding process while the other is far more intense but for a shorter duration. Is it possible that they are just different?

Floppage said:

I have heard stories that a lot of the really high stakes gambling involves long races (50 or 100) and can grind on for hours and hours. I can't even imagine how long "15 ahead" match would take between two pros.

My perception is that tournaments are usually much more intense for much shorter races.

To me, this feels like very different types of pressure. One is a long, grinding process while the other is far more intense but for a shorter duration. Is it possible that they are just different?

Click to expand...

I agree with that. I also think there are different skills involved in the two. In long gambling matches it's usually winner breaks, and so the ability to break well, play loose and in stroke, and get long packages of runouts is really important. In shorter race tournament formats, it's more likely to be alternate break, and playing tighter, minimizing errors, and playing safeties is more important.

1st 11 games - tournament player is better.
Last 11 games. Gambler is better.
All the games in the middle are about even.

define best player

justinb386 said:

When I think of the best gamblers in the world, I think of players that can play their best under any type of pressure, and maybe even better when money is on the line.

And then there are the greatest tournament players (like probably the Europeans for example) that may not play as strong when big money is being bet, or some that do not ever gamble (maybe it is against their religion).

I have heard the names Rodney Morris and Dennis Orcollo mentioned when people talk about who the best gamblers in the world are.

This may be a really silly question, but do you consider the best gamblers in the world to be the best, or are the best tournament players in the world really the best (with the most skill), in your opinion?

One other thing I am curious about, is why is the pressure of a cash game all that much different then the pressure of a tournament match?

There is some very big money on the line in some of these big tournaments, so I wonder why the greatest tournament player in the world might not have much of a chance against the greatest gambler in the world?

Are there other factors that I am not thinking of (other then skill level of the player and the pressure of the cash that is on the line)?

Thanks for any thoughts about this.

Click to expand...

well if best is for the money think:
if i do not Dennis and put my own money in the line he could easily robbe me
if i someone hustle on another player he could be better the best cause he collect the money?
if at a tour ex.world 9ball championships someone won is he the best or better than another ?
as long as there is no such think as a world ranking list with standards like snooker have(http://www.worldsnooker.com) there are a lot best players than another,after all there are chalenge matches with players own money,backers money,spectators money,calcuta money and much much money for every single wise guy out there...
for me when IOC put under their wing pool and the 1st Olympic champion of pool became real thats the best player (for at least next 4 years)
Happy New Years Day be healthy drive safe .

Gambling is a different skill set. In order to win consistently in a tournament you need to play good pool. In order to win consistently gambling you need to convince someone with a lot of money, that you DON'T play good pool. A player who is accurately assessed and weighted should (by definition) only win half their games.

Corwyn_8 said:

Gambling is a different skill set. In order to win consistently in a tournament you need to play good pool. In order to win consistently gambling you need to convince someone with a lot of money, that you DON'T play good pool. A player who is accurately assessed and weighted should (by definition) only win half their games.

Click to expand...

Not necessarily true. Some play better under different circumstances/pressure.

A player is a player is a player The skill level shouldn't change, stamina may come into effect in some cases.

Gambling Reality

I would have to say that people who gamble with their own I give the most respect.

In the last year I was needing to get past a point in my one pocket game that I didn't seem to be getting by so I found a guy who was way better than me and gambled for 20 a game once a week. It was the most sobering thing I have ever done. It had been so long since I had done that. I remembered every single mistake. The guy I played knew I was trying to correct some things and he was nice enough to give me a spot and fuss at me when I had something totally wrong. All I can say is it worked. It cost me some dough but it was a very necessary investment for me to get past a point I just wasn't getting on my own. If you are shooting a shot that might be stupid and you are shooting your money and you miss or screw up and then he runs out. You don't forget things like that. Its a stark reality and sometimes when you start getting it, it can become a high.

justinb386 said:

When I think of the best gamblers in the world, I think of players that can play their best under any type of pressure, and maybe even better when money is on the line.

And then there are the greatest tournament players (like probably the Europeans for example) that may not play as strong when big money is being bet, or some that do not ever gamble (maybe it is against their religion).

I have heard the names Rodney Morris and Dennis Orcollo mentioned when people talk about who the best gamblers in the world are.

This may be a really silly question, but do you consider the best gamblers in the world to be the best, or are the best tournament players in the world really the best (with the most skill), in your opinion?

One other thing I am curious about, is why is the pressure of a cash game all that much different then the pressure of a tournament match?

There is some very big money on the line in some of these big tournaments, so I wonder why the greatest tournament player in the world might not have much of a chance against the greatest gambler in the world?

Are there other factors that I am not thinking of (other then skill level of the player and the pressure of the cash that is on the line)?

Thanks for any thoughts about this.

Click to expand...

DoubleA said:

A player is a player is a player The skill level shouldn't change, stamina may come into effect in some cases.

Click to expand...

Huh? There have been LOTS of champions(mostly 14.1 players) that play like god for tin-cup but can't draw their ball for $10. Gambling, with your own money, is the truest test in pool. Anyone who thinks otherwise probably falls into the second group.

Each thrives in their own environment. Gambling & tournament play are completely different animals

sixpack said:

1st 11 games - tournament player is better.
Last 11 games. Gambler is better.

Click to expand...

What if it's a race to 11?

In a tournament I have two barrels.
In a gamble I can always reload.

Just saying........

randyg

Gambling matches test you in ways tournaments just don't. In a gambling match you have to ask yourself the question "Am I a better player than this guy?" In a tournament the answer is "it doesn't matter, I don't have to be better, I just have to get to 11" or whatever the race is to. Because of this cash players can put heat on their opponents that a tournament player will never dream of. And it is it's own skill, there have been many times when a 'better' player just can't understand why their opponent isn't giving up, and as a result it shakes their confidence and they dog it. I think gambling is an awesome test, and one that is extremely pure.

On the flip side there is not only nothing wrong with tournaments, they ultimately are for the titles. There is no way to shark, bluster, or woof your way into a world championship. It takes a tremendous rock solid skill set, both physically and mentally. At the highest levels there are still many tests of belief, compounded with never ending rows of champions trying to knock you down. You never have the comfort of a meaningful lead, and if you do it is wiped clean right when you build it. You have to start and stop, play early and late, play good and struggle through tough matches.

They are both really tough, and they both test slightly different skills. I would almost consider them different games, as different as 9 ball and straight pool.

I am a big fan of gambling, and I think the 'best money player in the world' should definitely be in the running when talking about the world's best...but at the end of the day I think the titles are where it's at. I didn't used to think so...but there are many ways to get the cash and often it boils down to game selection, playing when you're at your best (versus an opponent that might play when they're not as prepared), etc. There is only ONE way to get the cash in a tournament. And a series of tournaments, year after year, on different venues...only a true champ can get to the top.

have any non-World Championship caliber "gambler" play a World Championship player even, both on their own money....nothing goofy like 36 straight hours or something like that, and you'll likely find the WC player will win. When things do get goofy, spot wise, or no breaks in play, then and only then can the "gambler" get an advantage.

guys with world titles or other big titles (derby, us open, etc.) are tough cookies, and more than likely gamblers themselves....the "tournament player" label is kinda funny to me. Guys (considered really good gamblers) who occasionally cash at the Derby are NOT knocking on Niel's door to play a long set even, just cuz you don't hear about him playing a race to 100....

justinb386 said:

When I think of the best gamblers in the world, I think of players that can play their best under any type of pressure, and maybe even better when money is on the line.

And then there are the greatest tournament players (like probably the Europeans for example) that may not play as strong when big money is being bet, or some that do not ever gamble (maybe it is against their religion).

I have heard the names Rodney Morris and Dennis Orcollo mentioned when people talk about who the best gamblers in the world are.

This may be a really silly question, but do you consider the best gamblers in the world to be the best, or are the best tournament players in the world really the best (with the most skill), in your opinion?

One other thing I am curious about, is why is the pressure of a cash game all that much different then the pressure of a tournament match?

There is some very big money on the line in some of these big tournaments, so I wonder why the greatest tournament player in the world might not have much of a chance against the greatest gambler in the world?

Are there other factors that I am not thinking of (other then skill level of the player and the pressure of the cash that is on the line)?

Thanks for any thoughts about this.

Click to expand...

Every person is different. I have been out of the bigger Gambling for a long time. Only because I was tired of most of the A-Holes who needed to pull out the SHARKING moves. Got tired of the mind games too. They both have their pro's & cons. Somebody like Rodney Morris it wouldn't bother that much because simply he wouldn't put up with their nonsense. As far as tournament players well (in our area) you have to wait 2-3 hours sometimes to play a match. where a gambler has to play sometimes many hours straight. Some people can play for small money (practice kings) & some Can't play for small money because it makes them bored. But if you can find a practice buddy the same level as you, bet what you can afford per rack that should keep you focused enough. As far as me I love the competition of tournament play & meeting new friends. So now i'm mainly a tournament player unless somebody steps out of line. BTW I'll be playing for a $15,000.00 Added this weekend @ Castle Billiards in East Rutherford NJ. It will be streamed by AZB UPSTATE AL 1st should be about 10K Wish me luck !!! Hope this helps only my opinion don't kill me for it

Based on my experience, money players usually play tournaments very well. Jay Helfert said it about Justin Hall playing in the US Open 10-ball "He's very lax. Like he could do this all day."

Money players just have such a relaxed mentality about tournaments that allow them to fade pressure and let loose.

This isn't just with pros but with all different skill levels of players. The gambler/ money player, I think, is better.

Corwyn_8 said:

Gambling is a different skill set. In order to win consistently in a tournament you need to play good pool. In order to win consistently gambling you need to convince someone with a lot of money, that you DON'T play good pool. A player who is accurately assessed and weighted should (by definition) only win half their games.

Click to expand...

I agree. Its a different ball game out there when gambling comes into play... Especially with your own money. Look for example, Dennis Arcollo, his gambling play vs his tournament play... You decide.